Cargando…

Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?

A desire to make fitness testing cheaper and easier to conduct in a team-sport setting has led to the development of numerous field aerobic fitness tests. This has contributed to a growing confusion among strength and conditioning coaches about which one to use. The main aim of this narrative review...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bok, Daniel, Foster, Carl
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8395732/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34449680
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk6030069
_version_ 1783744236488753152
author Bok, Daniel
Foster, Carl
author_facet Bok, Daniel
Foster, Carl
author_sort Bok, Daniel
collection PubMed
description A desire to make fitness testing cheaper and easier to conduct in a team-sport setting has led to the development of numerous field aerobic fitness tests. This has contributed to a growing confusion among strength and conditioning coaches about which one to use. The main aim of this narrative review was to examine the reliability, validity, sensitivity and usefulness of the commonly used field aerobic fitness tests and to provide practical guidelines for their use in soccer. The University of Montreal track test (UMTT) and Vam Eval test seem the best options for estimation of maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2max)) while the highest signal-to-noise ratio of the 30-15 intermittent fitness test (30-15IFT) suggests its superior sensitivity to track changes in fitness. The UMTT and 30-15IFT are the best solutions for prescription of long and short high-intensity interval training sessions, respectively. All field tests mostly present with marginal usefulness, but the smallest worthwhile change for UMTT or Vam Eval test, Yo-YoIRT2 and 30-15IFT are smaller than their stage increment making the improvement of only one stage in the test performance already worthwhile. Strength and conditioning coaches are advised to choose the test based on their specific purpose of testing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8395732
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83957322021-08-28 Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose? Bok, Daniel Foster, Carl J Funct Morphol Kinesiol Review A desire to make fitness testing cheaper and easier to conduct in a team-sport setting has led to the development of numerous field aerobic fitness tests. This has contributed to a growing confusion among strength and conditioning coaches about which one to use. The main aim of this narrative review was to examine the reliability, validity, sensitivity and usefulness of the commonly used field aerobic fitness tests and to provide practical guidelines for their use in soccer. The University of Montreal track test (UMTT) and Vam Eval test seem the best options for estimation of maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2max)) while the highest signal-to-noise ratio of the 30-15 intermittent fitness test (30-15IFT) suggests its superior sensitivity to track changes in fitness. The UMTT and 30-15IFT are the best solutions for prescription of long and short high-intensity interval training sessions, respectively. All field tests mostly present with marginal usefulness, but the smallest worthwhile change for UMTT or Vam Eval test, Yo-YoIRT2 and 30-15IFT are smaller than their stage increment making the improvement of only one stage in the test performance already worthwhile. Strength and conditioning coaches are advised to choose the test based on their specific purpose of testing. MDPI 2021-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8395732/ /pubmed/34449680 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk6030069 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Bok, Daniel
Foster, Carl
Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?
title Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?
title_full Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?
title_fullStr Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?
title_full_unstemmed Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?
title_short Applicability of Field Aerobic Fitness Tests in Soccer: Which One to Choose?
title_sort applicability of field aerobic fitness tests in soccer: which one to choose?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8395732/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34449680
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jfmk6030069
work_keys_str_mv AT bokdaniel applicabilityoffieldaerobicfitnesstestsinsoccerwhichonetochoose
AT fostercarl applicabilityoffieldaerobicfitnesstestsinsoccerwhichonetochoose